Talk:Hitachi (Australian train)

	Trains Portal
DYK	2007-04-11

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.

This article lacks references.

Australia: Melbourne / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Hitachi (Australian train) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

six, six-carriage trains

six, six-carriage trains. Someone at Connex blurted out the number '3' when referring to the number of Hitachis still in service a few days ago in some media source (maybe a newspaper, maybe a magazine like Newsrail). Am I dreaming? --Mcbridematt 20:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The actual number is 7, six-car sets now. Xt881m (talk) 15:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Air conditioning

I dispute the assertion that none of the Hitachi trains had air conditioning. I have travelled on Hitachi trains in which air conditioning was operating. IIRC, the air conditioning is located in a series of vertical vents running the length of the carriage, parallel to and adjacent to the lights. However, the air conditioning was largely ineffectual and this may be the reason it was rarely used.

It is possible that the air conditioning was not installed on all carraiges, or only a subset of them. Also it has been a long time since I last travelled on a Hitachi trains so it is possible my recollection is flawed. Nevertheless it would be worth looking into this. --B.d.mills 23:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably heating you are thinking of. I believe the Hitachi's have a rarely used heating system. Air conditioning may be part of the refurbishment. Yellow Thirteen 06:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hitachis have never had aircon. Xt881m 03:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you saw was the forced air ventilation. This article on Vicsig mentions it. Wongm 04:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Hitachi's

As a member of a number of railway forums, The generally accepted number of Hitachi trains in service is 6, 6-car trains.

   * 10M-1909T-21M - 49M-1987T-196M
   * 37M-1979T-36M - 105M-1999T-178M
   * 57M-1922T-184M - 179M-1977T-129M
   * 46M-1975T-22M - 65M-1982T-88M
   * 144M-1919T-9M - 233M-2007T-23M
   * 197M-1981T-3M - 110M-1910T-42M

The above is their permanent set up, which would only be changed in an accident.

The above six consists have had driver-only air conditioning added late in 2006. It is rumored they are to be refurbished.

I've had confirmation from Connex the remaining 6 Hitachi's will be refurbished. Changes will be added to the article. Yellow Thirteen 06:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Driver aircon was added in the early 90's. Xt881m 03:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The driver aircon installed in late 2006 was a trial of an upgraded system, and fitted to a single M car. As Xt881m mentioned, the original driver air con was installed in the 1990s.

Refurbishment details

Until this "supposed" letter from Connex is posted in public (with their permission), the refurb details section has been removed. You are welcome to place it back if you post the verifiable text from those involved or otherwise confirmed in the media etc. --Mcbridematt 12:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I asked Connex via customer support, if you don't belive me, fine. More Railpage scum I take it? In case you haven't noticed, the whole article is unsourced. Yellow Thirteen 15:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This kind of stuff should have verifiable citation of sources. Xt881m 03:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, Including the whole article, and the Comeng article too. And probably the Sprogger and Crapper articles as well. Yellow Thirteen 09:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do we need an "other trains by Hitachi" section

Just a thought regarding this section. The convention for calling these trains "Hitachi trains" is a relatively recent one (until Comeng trains came in, they were known as "silver trains" and officially as "Stainless Steel trains" - see VicRail Power Parade, 1981). As it turns out, there are no Hitachi-supplied components, just electrical equipment supplied by Comeng, of Hitachi design. On this basis, it's probably a bit misleading to have a section that suggests they are a train "by Hitachi" and comparable to actual Hitachi-designed and built trains like the N700 Shinkansen. Perhaps it would be better to have a disambiguation page or have the information in this section in a separate list page? Zzrbiker (talk) 04:28, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 'other' stuff could go into the main Hitachi page. Wongm (talk) 06:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, trouble is that there's virtually nothing on the Hitachi page about Hitachi Rail. I'd almost consider a "See also" section with links to the N700 and Class 395 trains. Zzrbiker (talk) 05:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for removal of the Gallery section and separating images to different sections of the article

Hi all, I am currently proposing on what to do with the images and the Gallery section. My thought is to place some of the images already used in the Gallery to different sections and sub-sections of the article. The reason is because Gallery is likely not needed in this article and I think the images have a better section to place them on. What are your thoughts about the images, keep Gallery or move images to different sections? Thanks! PEPSI697 (talk) 15:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]